Whoops!

-

I have just removed a post for the first time after receiving a range of responses. What was intended as a bit of provocative fun probably went too far.

Comments

robertguyton said…
Good on you, sprout. Never bring up the topic of which side the toilet paper should unroll from, ever again!
Wall or user-side, it's too sensitive a subject, even for an open-minded reader-ship such as yours!
February 10, 2012 at 11:30 AM
Dave Kennedy said…
I can't help being amused by the role reversal here, Robert. ;-)

I had some interesting thoughts expressed on Facebook about it, too. The other interesting part about this is that I thought I might still leave a link to the article and the research that sparked it all and couldn't find it, however there were heaps of other studies done around the world producing similar results. I will leave such pursuits to the likes of Bomber in future.
February 10, 2012 at 3:46 PM
Ella B said…
Pity about removing the post. Seemed clear to me that it was written in jest.
In regards to your comment; my argument was made more of an idealogical one. I certainly do not endorse National's current approach to governing.
February 10, 2012 at 6:07 PM
Dave Kennedy said…
owlinalarkworld, although a number of people enjoyed reading the removed post I did receive a few comments as well as your own that questioned its value. I thought it best to remove it if it was going to have unintended consequences.

Please continue to comment and challenge my thinking.
February 10, 2012 at 9:17 PM
Dave Kennedy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
February 10, 2012 at 9:17 PM
robertguyton said…
Just checking, Dave...
"Role reversal" - was that intentional?
If so, you're the King!
February 11, 2012 at 8:10 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

FACT CHECKING DAVID SEYMOUR

-
Image
I was interested in David Seymour's public presentation of the Justice Select Committee's report after the submissions to the Treaty Principles Bill. I noted the arguments he presented and fact checked him. I welcome corrections and additions to what I have written but want to keep the responses concise. The Treaty of Waitangi does not represent a partnership. WRONG : Te Tiriti o Waitangi is a foundational document of New Zealand, establishing a relationship of partnership between the Crown and Māori. The principle of partnership, which requires the Crown and Māori to work in partnership in the governance, design, delivery, and monitoring of services, is a key aspect of the Treaty. All kiwis should be equal in their human rights before the law. DELIBERATELY MISLEADING : The Treaty of Waitangi is New Zealand's own unique statement of human rights. It includes both universal human rights and Indigenous rights. At a basic level of human rights we are treated the same, howeve...
Read more

The Destruction of New Zealand's Public Education System

-
Image
In 2008 New Zealand was internationally ranked in the top seven for educational achievement, and when you compared us with other countries that were also culturally diverse and experiencing growing inequality, we were extremely successful. At that time our Early Childhood sector had received a much overdue boost in funding from the Labour Government after being underfunded (as a % of GDP) compared to other OECD nations for years. The sector was working towards a target of having 100% qualified teachers in all centres. We were also in the process of implementing a new National Curriculum and a complementary curriculum for Maori ( Te Marautanga o Aotearoa ). Teachers were excited about putting all their energies into the new ideas and approaches that were espoused in these co-constructed documents that had taken around seven years to review and write. Evidence, research and practitioner input had created something that would allow us to prepare New Zealand children to become ...
Read more

Climate Change Just Got Personal

-
Image
Over ten years ago (2007) I organised a symposium on climate change to support a Climate Change Tour being conducted by the Green Co-leaders at the time, Jeanette Fitzsimons and Russel Norman. It was Norman who fronted at the Invercargill meeting and he was supported by his young staff member Gareth Hughes. We had over 40 attendees, including representatives from local councils and a scientist from NIWA, who also spoke. For many of those attending, the information they received was largely new to them. At that time the reality of climate change and its human causes were still being debated in homes around the country. Nothing substantial was really being done ten years ago, but the fifth Labour Government had passed the Climate Change Response Act in 2002 to provide a legal framework for ratifying the Kyoto agreement and to meet obligations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In 2008, just before the end of their term, the Labour Government established...
Read more